Florida GOP State Senator Stephen Wise is drawing fire with a legislative proposal that would require schools in the Sunshine State to dramatically change the way evolution is addressed in the classroom, primarily by requiring the teaching of an alternative he calls "non-evolution."

According to his legislation, public school teachers would have to "teach a thorough presentation and critical analysis of the scientific theory of evolution" to students.

"Why would you not teach both theories at the same time?" Wise, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said, according to the Tampa Tribune. "You have critical thinking in school," he continued, telling the outlet that he simply called his alternative "non-evolution."

Wise, who recently championed a successful push to end Florida teacher tenure in favor of a merit-pay system, has quickly received knocks for his bill.

"You can have critical analysis of everything, but the idea that you should single out evolution for critical analysis is problematic," said Joshua Rosenau of the California-based National Center for Science Education told the St. Augustine Record. "It's recognized by the scientific community as the foundation of modern biology."

Others, such as Brandon Haught of Florida Citizens for Science, have been less kind in their assessment of the measure.

It's not the first time Wise has tried his hand at this type of legislation. In 2009, Wise mounted a failed effort more specifically focused on teaching intelligent design in public schools. Wise told the Tribune this week, however, that he believes the state Legislature's growing conservative makeup could pave a way for the bill's successful passage this time around.

During his battle then, Wise, a retired teacher himself, made his case on a radio station for including an alternative to evolution in the public school system's science curriculum.

"Why do we still have apes if we came from them?" Wise asked during an interview with the Tampa's WMNF. "And those are the kind of questions kids need to ask themselves. You know, 'How did we get here?' And, you know, there's more than one theory on this thing. And the theory is evolution, the other one is intelligent design."

 In 1987, the U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in a Louisiana case, declared the teaching of creation science unconstitutional.

 A federal judge in 2005 ruled against school officials in Dover, Pa., who had tried to require the teaching of intelligent design. In a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, Judge John E. Jones III barred the district from "requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution."

 In 2004, the Ohio Board of Education approved a model lesson plan for 10th-graders titled "Critical Analysis of Evolution." But the plan was rescinded after the Dover, Pa., court ruling, according to information from Pew.

In 2006, South Carolina officials approved standards requiring high school students to "summarize ways that scientists use data from a variety of sources to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory."

The standards have apparently not been challenged in the courts. In 2008, the state Board of Education handed evolution advocates a victory when it approved a high school biology textbook that had been criticized for its inclusion of Darwin's theory.

 And in 2008, Louisiana adopted legislation similar to that proposed by Wise, according to Josh Rosenau, programs and policy director for the National Center for Science Education, dedicated to keep evolution in the classroom and to keep other theories out.

Although there are news reports of an effort to repeal the law, Rosenau said there hasn't been any litigation. "It's really hard to know what effect (the law is) having," he said.

Rosenau said Florida's existing science standards have been reviewed by national experts who found them to be "really good. The students are already doing the critical thinking."

"There's no reason for the state Legislature to mandate that particular scientific theories be taught or how they should be taught," Rosenau added. "There's no particular reason to single out evolution."

The Discovery Institute maintains the "critical analysis" approach to evolution is based on mainstream scientific criticism of Darwin's theory.

* * * * *
Wise denied that he is trying to introduce religion into the classroom.

"I think it's a way in which people can have critical thinking," he said of his bill. "If you just keep things away from folks, you don't have a good debate, you don't have, 'You give me your side and I'll give you my side,' and you look at the facts and make your decision.

"We're not saying you ought to be a Muslim, you ought to be Jewish, you ought to be Christian or you ought to be Baptist or Episcopalian; what we're saying is here's a theory, a theory of evolution, a theory of whatever, and you decide."

Howard Simon, executive director of the Florida ACLU, said Wise's bill "would require the teaching of intelligent design, which is  despite the proponents and the people in the Legislature who will jump up and scream that it is science and not religion  it is, at its heart, a theological belief."

Would the ACLU file a lawsuit if the bill becomes law?

That depends, Simon said, on how local school officials react.

"There would be litigation," he said, "were some county school district to be silly enough to be enticed by the legislation to teach religion instead of science."

If creationism is so silly, why would you be afraid of seeing it presented as an alternative.

You certainly support the teaching of other "alternatives" in schools, don't you?

Steve

ugotda7

03-17-2011, 07:56 PM

I much as I hate to say it...I agree with this post - a first.

"Creation Science" is a crock and has no place in school...well, other than religion classes - certainly not science classes.

If they do that then to be intellectually honest they'll have to teach about the Flying Spaghetti Monster also.

http://www.venganza.org/

ugotda7

03-17-2011, 07:59 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If creationism is so silly, why would you be afraid of seeing it presented as an alternative.

You certainly support the teaching of other "alternatives" in schools, don't you?

Steve </div></div>

It is irrelevant as a scientific alternative because it has no basis in science....it is religion and that is where it needs to remain.

pooltchr

03-17-2011, 08:33 PM

There are those who would argue that one is not mutually exclusive of the other. Is it possible that a higher life form was responsible for creating life through the use of evolution?

I'm just saying, we teach our kids that marriage doesn't need to be between a man and a woman, yet there are many who believe otherwise. We teach liberalism in schools, and there are many who don't believe in it.

If we are going to be "fair" and consistent, shouldn't we be offering all sides of an issue, so the students can decide for themselves?

Personally, I don't really care...but it seems like each side wants to block the other side from even being heard.

Steve

LWW

03-18-2011, 03:39 AM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ugotda7</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If creationism is so silly, why would you be afraid of seeing it presented as an alternative.

You certainly support the teaching of other "alternatives" in schools, don't you?

Steve </div></div>

It is irrelevant as a scientific alternative because it has no basis in science....it is religion and that is where it needs to remain. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If creationism is so silly, why would you be afraid of seeing it presented as an alternative.

You certainly support the teaching of other "alternatives" in schools, don't you?

Steve </div></div>

What's astounding is the amount of people who can practice doublethink to the level that they believe in "CREATIO EX NIHILO" ... that's creation from nothing for victims of public education ... while also maintaining the big bang therefore isn't science because no creation took place.

One of the many dangers of being spoon fed one's "OPINION" is that it inevitably leads to unreconcilable paradox.

The said part is that the victim of the doublethink ... through the concurrent practice of "BLACKWHITE" ... is oblivious to the paradox their brainwashing has created.

Qtec

03-18-2011, 06:20 AM

A Creationist for you.

link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ3Fw3wZouM&feature=related)

Oops.

debunked (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLqQttJinjo&feature=related)

You really want this sort of nonsense being taught in places of education?